Green Room

This Could Be Happening: Kate Gosselin Goes Camping With Sarah Palin

Because Bristol and Levi’s engagement announcement in Us Weekly just wasn’t enough, In Touch reports that Kate Gosselin and children have filmed an episode of Kate + Eight in Alaska…with Sarah Palin:

Forget ex-husband Jon — Kate Gosselin could rename her TLC hit Sarah & Kate Plus 8! In Touch can exclusively reveal that Kate and her brood have traveled to Alaska with cameras in tow to meet up with the northern state’s most famous resident, Sarah Palin. “Sarah, Kate and the kids will go camping,” a source says, adding that Sarah’s father, a retired science teacher, and brother, a third-grade educator, will conduct a hands-on natural history lesson for 9-year-old twins Mady and Cara, and 6-year-old sextuplets Aaden, Joel, Collin, Leah, Hannah and Alexis. A mother of a big family herself, former vice presidential candidate Sarah is thrilled about the upcoming visit. “She’s excited because it will be fun and educational for the children. Sarah will even teach Kate how to avoid bears!” the insider adds.

Kate Gosselin is no stranger to the odd scandal, even if most were the antics of her browbeaten lump of an ex- husband, Jon. While I’m not necessarily opposed to the show concept itself, one wonders what the logic was in approving the project. If Sarah wishes to avoid the indelible stain of reality TV notoriety, would taping one with Kate “Dancing with the Stars” Gosselin be the way to go?

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Comments

One of the reasons journalists end up as journalists, and actors as actors, and talking-heads as talking-heads is that they simply DON’T HAVE THE ANALYTICAL CHOPS to make it into law school, med school or pass a CPA or CFA test.

This is true. I’ve worked in a newsroom; they are not the brightest bulbs. And the ones I knew didn’t have much in the way of verbal ability either. I’ve never heard such horrible grammar in my life.

I’ve seen those SAT-IQ and GRE-IQ correlation charts. For most people, they are probably not far off the mark. I did much better on the GRE than the SAT because they actually taught me some math in college whereas my public high school did not, so there is a pretty big disparity for me.

Yes, because Hot Air would totally be more interested in a story about a sinkhole in Milwaukee, rather than a story about Palin being on a reality television show. Because sinkholes are big news. And Palin isn’t.

Bee’s theme seems to be “don’t shoot the messenger, it’s in the news.”. I pointed out that she doesn’t choose to write about everything in the news. In fact, she doesn’t appear to write about everything buzzing on political news sites.

Is “why write about this rumor, when a bunch of others (divorce, FBI trouble etc) have been false?” a fair question in your opinion?

Bee/ Diane can write what she wants. However, to write “discuss among yourselves,” then get apparently defensive when “why write about this?” and “many Palin rumors have been false” seems… A bit dramatic.

Why do you want to deny Bee her chance to join in the “use Palin for snark” game at HA? It got her a post in the Green Room didn’t it? Someone has to take the heat off Allah and troll the gossip sheets for dirt on Palin

It wont be a problem for me to retract this if it proves false. It was in the news. Deal with it.

Bee on July 23, 2010 at 7:58 PM

How nice that if it turns out this is just another rumor you’ll join in the futile effort to rein in something you helped spread. So if someone spreads a rumor that you get your Palin points at one of the anti-Palin Alaskan gutter blogs and it comes out that it’s not true all it will take is a retraction? /

Bee’s theme seems to be “don’t shoot the messenger, it’s in the news.”. I pointed out that she doesn’t choose to write about everything in the news. In fact, she doesn’t appear to write about everything buzzing on political news sites.

I try to write about stories others haven’t posted on ad nauseam. I’ve not been writing in the GR for long, but, if you click that handy link embedded in my name, it will direct you to my archives here, at David Horowitz’ Newsreal Blog, and my own smaller site.

Is “why write about this rumor, when a bunch of others (divorce, FBI trouble etc) have been false?” a fair question in your opinion?

Bee/ Diane can write what she wants. However, to write “discuss among yourselves,” then get apparently defensive when “why write about this?” and “many Palin rumors have been false” seems… A bit dramatic.

cs89 on July 24, 2010 at 8:01 AM

I said “deal with it” and “cope” because of the inability for some here to understand why this story exists at all. Basically, it’s out there, I have this platform to write + an opinion = post. Why wouldn’t HA wouldn’t want to talk about something a major political player may or may not be doing?

Why do you want to deny Bee her chance to join in the “use Palin for snark” game at HA? It got her a post in the Green Room didn’t it? Someone has to take the heat off Allah and troll the gossip sheets for dirt on Palin

1. No one is using Sarah for anything. It was on every news site already at the time of my posting, I had an opinion and decided to put it out there.
2. Click my name, look at my archives here and at Newsreal Blog and tell me how this one piece on Palin earned me a spot in the Green Room.
3. It’s called a RS reader. I use Feedly. I have a ton of tech sites, two Hollywood sites, several British papers, two econ papers, several poli blogs and most major U.S. newspapers on my daily feed. So, I wouldn’t necessarily call myself one who “trolls gossip sheets for dirt” on Palin.

Why wouldn’t HA wouldn’t want to talk about something a major political player may or may not be doing?

Bee on July 24, 2010 at 12:41 PM

I don’t think that’s it, for me anyway. I think it’s fine to mention the story, but if you’re going to do a whole post about it, why not also mention that the only source for the info is an unnamed “insider” “source” according to InTouch Weekly? Even if other sites are picking it up, as far as I know InTouch is their only source. No confirmation yet from any major parties.

Yet you ran with it without the slightest “if this turns out to be true” caveat or question mark in the headline, even though other similar gossip stories about Palin have turned out to be false.

The result is that many if not most readers are going to think the story has been confirmed. You can see evidence of this in other threads already. And if it does turn out not to be true and you issue a correction, not everyone will see it.

Why wouldn’t HA wouldn’t want to talk about something a major political player may or may not be doing?

Bee on July 24, 2010 at 12:41 PM

Just spitballing here, but…

maybe because it’s apparently an unconfirmed rumor, based on one anonymous source, with all those other news stories linked back to that one gossip site? And because there’s a history of frenzied Palin stories which have turned out to be either false or very overblown?

Just my take.

Again, write whatever you like, wherever you can. Based on what I’ve read in the GreenRoom, though, I think I’ll take your offer to read your additional stuff on other sites with a “thanks, but no thanks.”

So here’s the patter: when one of these rumors surfaces, HA posts it with an analysis of how stupid it would be for Palin to do this rumored activity. Cynics and supporters go at it for a couple of days, ripping into each other. Concerned bloggers lament…,

“OMG, if she does this, she’ll jump the shark!”

“How can Palinistas defend THIS!? Ehh???”

…etc.

Then the crazy rumor turns out to be false or simply fades away, but that part pretty much goes unnoticed and we’re left with a couple of days of negative Palin speculation.

So all the left has to do is continue putting this bait out for us to bite in order to falsely give the impression she’s an idiot? Shall we do this every time?

Btw, has this even been confirmed yet? Any follow-up? Usually when I hear these rumors on HA I check C4P to find the real scoop, but there’s no mention of it at all.

I pointed out that she doesn’t choose to write about everything in the news. In fact, she doesn’t appear to write about everything buzzing on political news sites.

cs89 on July 24, 2010 at 7:57 AM

…and?

I don’t write about everything buzzing on political news sites, either. Know why? Ed and Allah usually take care of that. Or not everything buzzing on political news sites is interesting. That’s the whole point. Why write an article if no one would be interested in reading it?

Maybe people who never write shouldn’t be lecturing others on how to do it. Maybe they should do it themselves.

Btw, has this even been confirmed yet? Any follow-up? Usually when I hear these rumors on HA I check C4P to find the real scoop, but there’s no mention of it at all.

Dongemaharu on July 24, 2010 at 8:09 PM

Yeah, I know what you mean. When I hear a rumor that Obama has done something boneheaded, the first place I go is DailyKos, because the place I’m going to confirm a rumor about someone is a site that is heavily biased in favor of him.

Maybe people who never write shouldn’t be lecturing others on how to do it. Maybe they should do it themselves.

MadisonConservative on July 25, 2010 at 1:43 AM

A. Quite an assumption there that I “never write,” though clearly I don’t write articles for this blog site.

B. You still don’t seem willing to address my central question: Why is Bee/Diane so concerned that commenters, that she has invited to “discuss amonst yourselves,” are questioning if this story is accurate, and why it was selected?

I could be wrong, but it looks to be as if she’s pretty defensive around these questions.

I think this question has been answered sufficiently, from the source. If I were concerned with people disagreeing with me I would have launched in on page one. I didn’t. It wasn’t until the predictable “HA hates Sarah” tripe began to pour in that I said something. At the same time, I had a legitimate misunderstanding with lansing quaker which I apologized for. Your (relentless) interest in my motivation and others questioning my integrity for clarifying the title, even, were met with further annoyed clarification which is my prerogative…as are your comments.

You know, for something you seem to think is mere rumor, you sure are spending a lot of time over here.